Connected: An Internet Encyclopedia
RFC 1880 - 5.1. The RFC Processing Decision Table

Top: Connected: An Internet Encyclopedia
Up: Requests For Comments
Up: RFC 1880
Up: 5. The Standards Track
Prev: 5. The Standards Track
Next: 5.2. The Standards Track Diagram

### 5.1. The RFC Processing Decision Table

Here is the current decision table for processing submissions by the RFC Editor. The processing depends on who submitted it, and the status they want it to have.

          +==========================================================+
          |**************|               S O U R C E                 |
          +==========================================================+
          | Desired      |    IAB   |   IESG   |   IRSG   |  Other   |
          | Status       |          |          |          |          |
          +==========================================================+
          |              |          |          |          |          |
          | Standard     |  Bogus   |  Publish |  Bogus   |  Bogus   |
          | or           |   (2)    |   (1)    |   (2)    |   (2)    |
          | Draft        |          |          |          |          |
          | Standard     |          |          |          |          |
          +--------------+----------+----------+----------+----------+
          |              |          |          |          |          |
          |              |  Refer   |  Publish |  Refer   |  Refer   |
          | Proposed     |   (3)    |   (1)    |   (3)    |   (3)    |
          | Standard     |          |          |          |          |
          |              |          |          |          |          |
          +--------------+----------+----------+----------+----------+
          |              |          |          |          |          |
          |              |  Notify  |  Publish |  Notify  |  Notify  |
          | Experimental |   (4)    |   (1)    |   (4)    |   (4)    |
          | Protocol     |          |          |          |          |
          |              |          |          |          |          |
          +--------------+----------+----------+----------+----------+
          |              |          |          |          |          |
          | Information  |  Publish |  Publish |Discretion|Discretion|
          | or Opinion   |   (1)    |   (1)    |   (5)    |   (5)    |
          | Paper        |          |          |          |          |
          |              |          |          |          |          |
          +==========================================================+

          (1) Publish.

          (2) Bogus.  Inform the source of the rules.  RFCs specifying
              Standard, or Draft Standard must come from the IESG, only.

          (3) Refer to an Area Director for review by a WG.  Expect to see
              the document again only after approval by the IESG.

          (4) Notify both the IESG and IRSG.  If no concerns are raised in
              two weeks then do Discretion (5), else RFC Editor to resolve
              the concerns or do Refer (3).

          (5) RFC Editor's discretion.  The RFC Editor decides if a review
              is needed and if so by whom.  RFC Editor decides to publish or
              not.

Of course, in all cases the RFC Editor can request or make minor changes for style, format, and presentation purposes.

The IESG has designated the IESG Secretary as its agent for forwarding documents with IESG approval and for registering concerns in response to notifications (4) to the RFC Editor. Documents from Area Directors or Working Group Chairs may be considered in the same way as documents from "other".

Next: 5.2. The Standards Track Diagram

Connected: An Internet Encyclopedia
RFC 1880 - 5.1. The RFC Processing Decision Table